0

After he completed "Red" (1994), the final film in his "Three Colors" trilogy,Krzysztof Kieslowski announced that he would retire. This was not a man weary of work. It was the retirement of a magician, a Prospero who was now content to lay aside his art--"to read and smoke." When he died two years later, he was only 56. Because he made most of his early work in Poland during the Cold War, and because his masterpiece "The Decalogue" consists of 10 one-hour films that do not fit easily on the multiplex conveyor belt , he has still not received the kind of recognition given those he deserves to be named with , like Bergman, Ozu, Fellini, Keaton and Bunuel. He is one of the filmmakers I would turn to for if I learned I was dying, or to laugh with on finding I would live after all.

Does it mean: he is in the same level as these great filmmakers.

Source: https://www.rogerebert.com/reviews/great-movie-three-colors-trilogy-blue-white-red

1
  • Kieslowski deserves to be named (identified, categorised) with, alongside, in the same group as other highly-regarded directors, such as those specified. Understand he deserves to be named with X as an alternative to he should be ranked / rated alongside (those other directors) - who it's assumed the reader will recognise as being among the "greats" (in the film world). Jan 11, 2020 at 14:24

1 Answer 1

1

It is unusual construction, but it relates to the more widely used expression named as which is used to indicate that somebody belongs to a particular, and often prestigious, group.

Albert Relf was named as one of Wisden's five cricketers of the year of 1913 - Bats, Baronets and Battle

but, rather than saying

he deserves to be named as one of the great filmmakers

He uses named with and then lists people that he considers to be great filmmakers.

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .